How crass is your music?

In response to a video from the Low Anthem I posted earlier this month, regular commenter Dan VBD asked an interesting question. I’m posting his entire question here- though my response is limited to music- and hope some of you will chime in.

I am curious if the name of this album [Oh My God, Charlie Darwin] bothers you in anyway? I know as a father of young children the crassness of the language in every day life bothers me. It is one thing that I have made a point of standing up against. I have been at a local park with my young kids while teenagers have been swearing at each other and I have asked them to consider the others in the park. On another occasion I was in a local parking lot where two young women were trading the most vile language I have ever heard as loudly as humanly possible. While parents with kids rushed into stores a few of us phoned the police. I believe words matter. I would think that as person in a leadership position in the Christian community that dishonoring words would matter to you. I would appreciate your response. Maybe I am just a prude but someday you may find yourself in my shoes sitting in a park wondering why we have sat back and let public discourse become so crude.

I agree with Dan that language matters and I’m coming to better understand his concerns as a parent about what words his kids are exposed to. The distinction I’d make is that all words matter, not only the ones we hear as crass and offensive. There are plenty of songs that may avoid certain words, but which nevertheless communicate ideas and values far removed from those of my Christian community.

From my vantage point, all art will contain within it elements that contradict the priorities of the coming Kingdom of God. It could be that crass words are proof of this opposition, but just as often it will be veiled in language both benign and subtle. The danger of focusing primarily on certain words when deciding which art to interact with is that entire streams of thought are ignored. While our ears may be protected from offensive language, our minds are uncritically engaged with ideas opposed to the Gospel of Jesus.

I hope my son grows up with the ability to discern not only good words from bad, but between destructive ideas and philosophies and those that point to beauty, justice, and life.

Thoughts?

David Swanson

April 26, 2010

art, culture

5 responses to “How crass is your music?”

Tony

April 26, 2010 at 7:43 pm

I agree, David. Cultural taboos often bleed into Christian moral-values (and thats a good thing), but we will often be required to examine a lot more than the vocabulary used by our singer/songwriters.

My trouble is that I often find a form of tragic beauty in a crass or raw message. There can be loads of truth and honesty in some of the more brutal images created by artists. For example, I wouldn’t care as much about Frodo and Aragorn prevailing against Mordor if orcs weren’t the ugliest things I’ve ever seen. Boromir’s defeat is brutal, graphic, and violent. But it is also tragically beautiful.

I’d like to discuss this: Do you think there is a difference between depicting and endorsing? Can some artists use crass language to depict “crass” situations, while not necessarily endorsing it?

I avoid artists and music that endorse any sort of immoral behavior… but maybe there is something to be said for those artists who attempt to depict life honestly, even the ugly (or taboo) parts of it.

I would like to believe that I am able to understand something without endorsing it. And through understanding, I can then enjoy its aesthetic value. Do you think this is possible?

(A band that comes to mind is The Format, now known as Fun. I love their tunes and I find their lyrics uniquely poetic and honest. While I can count the number of “bad words” used by the band on one hand, they are there nonetheless.)

And those are my thoughts.

Reply
Dan VDM

April 27, 2010 at 9:55 pm

Just to be clear I was referring to the words in bold This God Dammed House.
Today I was working at a customers home and in just the course of normal conversation he kept saying god dam this and god dam that. He is a great person but personally I find it troubling that our everyday language has become so crass. He could have easily communicated the same things without the expletives. This seems to be the trend of many decent programs on TV. It seems primarily for the shock value and to say this isn’t your parents show.
To be fair you could easily call me a hypocrite because I also watch shows, movies etc. that routinely use tasteless and unnecessary language. Through your blog you have provide people like me a look into your life that you don’t have into mine. This level of transparency would be one of the top reason I would find myself answering why not to blog.
I would like to also say that when we first visited Parkview looking for a new church you were the pastor preaching that day. I don’t have the slightest idea what you preached on that day but I do remember that at the end of the service you said if anything I said bothers you my e-mail is on the back of the bulletin. When a friend that knew we had been to Parkview asked how we liked it I said I liked that the pastor said if anything I said bothers you…
Well right or wrong this does bother me on some level. To be honest it is easier to leave the park or avoid something that bothers me then it is to try to politely express my concerns. Hopefully I do it in a God honoring way.

Reply
Daniel Kaiser

April 28, 2010 at 5:52 am

I like Paul Tripp’s thoughts language:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YUtPBCELCZc&feature=related

Reply
stanford

April 28, 2010 at 9:09 am

The rest of the world gets so confused about why we care so much about naughty language. They want to see us worked up about the legitimate evil they see around them every day…and we expend our efforts battling trivialities. Sam Hariss (that youngest and best looking of the ‘New Atheists’) captures the cultural puzzlement over this:

“One of the most pernicious effects of religion is that it tends to divorce morality from the reality of human and animal suffering. Religion allows people to imagine that their concerns are moral when they are not – that is, when they have nothing to do with suffering or its alleviation.” (Letter to a Christian Nation)

Artists, Christian and not, need to have the full palate of verbal expression available to evoke the affections they are trying to evoke (or subvert). I do not know the referent of the album title, but I would argue that until you can articulate why they selected it, you cannot reject it for simply being deeply evocative language. Maybe they are being artfully subversive (which, given my estimable respect for the band, would not surprise me). That is not what the commandment is about. The commandment is primarily about claiming God’s ownership of human endeavors (attributing God’s name to things that are not his). Christians believe that it is the inside of the vessel, not the outside that makes it clean. It is the beauty, objective and purpose of art that determines its value…not the form.

Reply
mkwashin

April 28, 2010 at 3:18 pm

I think the use of language has to be connected to social context, the social context of both the listener and the speaker. I tend to think of words as neutral tools which people turn into good or bad tools. I do believe in poor language and I cringe when I hear certain things said. But I am trying to step beyond my initial impressions of words and the people who use them. I think encountering art and literature in music or print is an invitation for me to inspect my assumptions about words and the people who use them. I assume things about communicators and my assumptions might be misguided. The closer I come to understanding a person’s social location, his or her place in society, the more fitted I am to evaluate the meaning of that individual’s words. If I know nothing about what that person experiences in life, I don’t think it’s up to me to say his use of that word is bad, or her use of this phrase is particularly good. This doesn’t mean to me that I shouldn’t speak up, that I shouldn’t speak my truth or promote my convictions with words, about words. I should. It just means that I should do so with an increasing understanding of somebody else’s experience, however beautiful or painful. Art gives me that opportunity just as walking down Belmont during my lunch break or 51st right after the students leave Kenwood.

Reply